ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
Comparing corneal biomechanical parameters between primary open-angle glaucoma and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma using corvis ST.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare corneal biomechanical properties between primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (PXG) using CorVis ST.
methodsThirty-three eyes of 33 patients with PXG and 29 eyes of 29 patients with POAG were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. All eyes underwent CorVis ST. Biomechanical parameters at the first and second applanation and highest concavity were measured. Man-Whitney U test and stepwise linear regression were used to compare the parameters between groups.
resultsThe mean age was 67.1 ± 7.9 and 70.3 ± 7.1 years in the POAG and PXG groups, respectively (P = 0.072). Eighteen patients in each group were male (P = 0.549). Intraocular pressure (IOP) measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry was not different between groups (P = 0.112) while the PXG group had higher biomechanically corrected IOP (14.3 ± 3.5 mmHg vs. 15.9 ± 3.4 mmHg; P = 0.042). Central corneal thickness was lower in the PXG group (546 ± 29 μm vs. 523 ± 37 μm; P = 0.008). A2 velocity was lower in the PXG group (P = 0.008). The highest concavity (HC) deformation amplitude and deflection length and peak distance were lower in the PXG group (p < 0.05). The PXG eyes had a higher stress-strain index (1.29 ± 0.26 vs. 1.42 ± 0.27; P = 0.022).
conclusionThe results of the current investigation are in favor of the presence of a stiffer cornea in the PXG group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.